5/21/2014

The left’s war on women never slows and never tires. And in California last week, we were again reminded that the womb can be the most dangerous place for an unborn girl.

On Tuesday, thirteen Democrats on the California State Assembly Health Committee voted down a bill that would have outlawed the practice of sex selection through abortion.

The Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act (AB 2336) ran into opposition by all of the Democrats on the committee, who saw the bill as a prelude to broader abortion restrictions… Instead, Democrats introduced a resolution to condemn sex-selection abortion–but not to outlaw it.

The bill was introduced on May 6th by Assemblywoman Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield), who said in her opening testimony that “the U.N. estimates that upwards of 200 million girls around the world have been aborted merely because they were ‘the wrong gender.'” She explained that countries like India and China are dominated by a male-child mentality, with mothers preferring future working men and family providers over the “burden” of baby girls.

Grove cited evidence that women from China, India, and other nations where the practice has been outlawed are now coming to California to take advantage of the state’s dangerously deregulated abortion laws.

What a twisted irony: Pro-aborts, feminists and the state Democrats will move mountains to see that current abortion rights remain protected – even if it means the selective killing of females.

“This is the real war on women: the killing of baby girls simply because they are girls,” Grove told committee members. “We hear often in this Capitol building about women’s rights, equal rights for women, equal protection under the law, equal pay. Well colleagues, girls are being killed simply for being girls and its happening right here in California and not just Third World nations.”

townhall.com, April 2014: On some campuses, some students are playing a game of what we might call “Dump the Speaker.” Conservative speakers chosen to deliver commencement addresses are being howled off campus by leftist student organizations and faculty as well. It’s either a left-wing speaker — or none.

Rutgers University recently faced this by inviting Condoleezza Rice and refused to budge. But Brandeis University has just knuckled under to student and faculty protests over its announced speaker, author Ayaan Hirsi Ali. She was disinvited.

You’d think a human rights advocate would be cheered by these liberals. You’d think they’d positively swoon at a human rights advocate for women! But, no. She is a conservative.

The Muslim students and their “allies” didn’t want to hear anything Ali had to say about honor killings or female gender mutilation. Explaining why 86 faculty members signed a demand the invitation be revoked, professor Bernadette Brooten offered an empty justification: Non-Muslims commit violence, too.

“We stressed that we recognize the harm of female genital cutting, forced marriages, and honor killings, but that this selection obscures the violence against women [that] happens among non-Muslims.”

When Stalin said that capitalists would sell them the rope with which they’d be hung with, I think of the scenario of all the abortions and low-birth rates occurring among various liberal women, and of their coddling reactionary Islamism. Should we therefore shed a tear when the left is strung up by that “rope?”

I’d like to know why they want to even condemn sex-selection abortion. Don’t they think that abortion is a constitutional right? On what possible basis do they condemn this otherwise legal procedure? Isn’t it between a woman and her doctor?

Grove cited evidence that women from China, India, and other nations where the practice has been outlawed are now coming to California to take advantage of the state’s dangerously deregulated abortion laws.

I watched the video and did not see her citing evidence. Her first witness did cite evidence though. That witness was quoting from this article.

That article doesn’t suggest that anyone is coming to California to take advantage of the state’s laws; rather it notes that, among the state’s Asian community, “keepsake” ultrasound centers may be contributing to gender-based abortion.

Using public health records from the California Department of Public Health between 2005 and 2009, Dr. Lin computed the BSRs (female births per 1000 male births) for the 4 predominant racial categories: Asian, black, Hispanic, and white. These data were then parsed by county, taking into account those areas with both 4-dimensional sonography centers in operation and relatively high Asian populations (ie, Santa Clara county, which is 27% Asian compared with 12% for California overall).

Results of this analysis were striking. “In every single year, Asians had a lower [BSR] than any other ethnic group,” reported Dr. Lin. “The normal range for gender ratio is 950 to 960 [per 1000], but in this analysis, Asians go down as low as 920 [per 1000] on average. In Santa Clara County, there were 4 years where it went below 910.”

I think that adjusting ultrasound accreditation to regulate these centers might be an easier fix. I’m not sure how you could enforce that law — couldn’t a woman just lie about the reason for the abortion?

Here’s video of the hearing. The relevant discussion states about 1 hour in.

I don’t know what the problem is. I mean, nothing bad ever happens when a country has an overabundance of marriage-age men with no chance of finding a person to marry. I mean, what’s the worst a country could do with hordes of men age 18 to 30 with no prospects in their lives, really having nothing to live for.

What we are seeing from the Chinese and the Indians is the patriarchical oligarchy (or oligarchical patriarchy). NO, I AM NOT PARODYING FEMINIST SCREED. Pre-natal testing and safe abortions can be afforded by the relatively few well-off. The rich will have sons, the poor will provide harems and serving wenches for them. The population of poor males, who might resent not having enough women to go around, will be “controlled” by the usual means — war, unsafe occupations, executions for pretextual crimes.

You would think that our pussy-drunk lesbians who call themselves feminists would see this. My guess is that they do, but they could not care less for the next generation, male or female. They’re purely selfish, self-indulgent, carpet-scraping whores.

But you know what else? Sonograms for determining sex are not all that accurate. You might not see something hanging down. And invasive procedures might pick up mommie dearest’s cells for the karyotype. So they’re likely aborting boys thinking they’re girls. I can’t say that the joke’s on them, unfortunately. It’s not a joke.

As you consider the murderous implications of the liberal facist police state that is quickly being erected around us, how can you not ponder the revulsion the rest of the world has for the forced introduction of al things Amerivan upon them? How does the abduction of 200 girls by a khat chewing psychopath in Nigeria compare to a machine that tears hundreds of thousands of healthy babies from the womb each year and then utilizes their once live tissue for grotesque medical experiments ?

The American people are awakening to the Orwellian nightmare that is being constructed to control us and correspondingly imprison us if we rebel. The government of these semi-United states knows this and responds in kind by shrinking the military and militarizing all domestic police agencies. SWAT teams and military equipment at the ready, they are prepared to force their immoral state of existence upon us.

…In 1998, the Indian government authorized the “Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques” (PNDT) Act of 1994, alaw that prohibits any person or body from using equipment or techniques for the purpose of detecting the sex of an unborn child.

There are exceptions for diagnoses of specified sex-linked diseases or disorders. The law also prohibits anyone from communicating the sex of the fetus if it is detected during a pre-natal examination or diagnostic test.

The law requires, among other things, that all practitioners, clinics, genetic counseling centers, etc. that perform pre-natal diagnoses register with the government, obtain a certificate of registration, and display a notice regarding the prohibitions on fetal sex detection.

Then in 2004, the government implemented the 2002 amendments to the PNDT Act, explicitly recognizing the responsibility of manufacturers and distributors to assure proper use of ultrasound equipment, prohibiting them from selling, renting, permitting or authorizing the use of ultrasound machines for fetal sex determination, and imposing criminal punishment such as fines and jail time.

Manufacturers must confirm that the customer has a valid PNDT Certificate and has signed an affidavit stating that the equipment shall
not be used for sex determination.

Manufacturers also must provide the government with a quarterly report disclosing to whom the equipment has been sold.

GE has observed that these laws are weakly enforced by the government, that reports of female feticide are still commonplace, if not increasing, and that other reports point to declining numbers of female live births relative to male live births in many areas of both rural and urban India.

In India and China, however, which both need low cost alternatives for diagnosis and treatment, ultrasound use is regulated because of the common practice of using it to determine sex of the fetus and then to selectively abort female fetuses …

…It is much cheaper to get an obstetrical ultrasound in India than in the US, but still very expensive in comparison to overall cost of living. Getting an abortion is also relatively inexpensive, but costs money, which poor families actually don’t have. It is far less expensive to have the baby and abandon it or kill it, and female infanticide is also pretty common in India….

….General Electric Healthcare, the company that makes the tiny pocket ultrasound that I use, and also makes a full range of amazing ultrasound equipment, was severely criticized and was even in legal troubles regarding the perception that they were complicit in sex determination of fetuses. This file describes their experience. Apparently they are actively involved in trying to enforce Indian law and have, according to some of my contacts, been less willing to donate equipment in India, which they had done before. The manufacturers are legally responsible for how their equipment is used, per a 2004 change in the laws about prenatal sex discrimination.

It seems to me that the attempt to regulate use of ultrasound in order to reduce the abortion of female fetuses is doomed to complete failure. It is just too easy to do an ultrasound and see a fetus’s genitalia.

“I mean, nothing bad ever happens when a country has an overabundance of marriage-age men with no chance of finding a person to marry.”

I am seeing, in a very small sample of course, a change in the old practice of Chinese women marrying only Chinese men. They are marrying caucasian men and subtracting even more from the pool of women eligible as wives for young Chinese men. I suspect it has something to do with the policies of the Chinese government toward women.

Barbara Nguyen, a public relations representative whose fiance is of Caucasian and Guatemalan heritage, has mostly dated Caucasian men, she said. She has been drawn to well-educated, creative leaning men from suburban backgrounds, and the type of men who have fit into those categories have generally been white, she said.

My daughter has friends from China. The man was teaching English and ended up living with, then marrying, one of his students. One of my medical students was from China and was married to a man from Chile.

27. If she’d said some well-off people from India do this because they don’t know who to bribe to find out the sex of their baby, it might have made sense.

It’s not clear to me how teh bill wass crafted – newspaper articles often omit essential detals. but there does seem to have bene in it (at least according to the opposition) some element of gagging doctors:

“My constituents do not support this particular effort in restricting access to reproductive health services or interfering in that relationship that a woman has with her physician,” said Sebastian Ridley-Thomas (D-Culver City).

Chairman of the Assembly Health Committee Dr. Richard Pan reportedly called the practice of gender-selection abortion “abhorrent,” but still voted against the bill, saying, “It actually criminalizes the discussion between a physician and their patient around reproductive choices.”

What exactly did the proposed bill do??

It’s likely actually, it would have been mostly ineffective, except morally.

I don’t get it. What difference does it make to a baby whether she’s killed for being a girl or for any other reason? Dead is dead.

And what sense does it make to tell a woman “you have the constitutional right to kill your daughter for any reason, or for no reason at all, except that you may not do it because she’s a girl”?

Also, how could this possibly be enforced? All the woman has to say is that she declines to give her reason for wanting her baby dead. And if she does say the reason, the provider will be sure to tell her that she can’t say that, and to pretend not to have heard it. Even if an affidavit under oath were to be required, anybody willing to murder an innocent baby is a fortiori willing to perjure herself.

And you can’t make a law preventing doctors or ultrasound technicians from telling women their baby’s sex; that would be a blatant violation of the first amendment.

What difference does it make to a baby whether she’s killed for being a girl or for any other reason? Dead is dead.

I think they are more concerned about the attitude of adults toward baby girls that are norn, than they are about baby girls.

And then, there’s the other thing that mentioned that a Rabbi said somewhere in the Talmud: every man wants a boy but if everyone were to gte it, the world would not endure. (I couldn’t find it, so something is a bit off here)

And you can’t make a law preventing doctors or ultrasound technicians from telling women their baby’s sex; that would be a blatant violation of the first amendment

They could try to get all buyers of ultrasound sonogram machines to sign away that right, like they make people in the CIA do.

What we are seeing from the Chinese and the Indians is the patriarchical oligarchy (or oligarchical patriarchy). NO, I AM NOT PARODYING FEMINIST SCREED…

…You would think that our pussy-drunk lesbians who call themselves feminists would see this. My guess is that they do, but they could not care less for the next generation, male or female. They’re purely selfish, self-indulgent, carpet-scraping whores…

Comment by nk (dbc370) — 5/21/2014 @ 8:00 am

Of course they see it, and of course they don’t care. Because the purpose of feminism, as is the purpose of all gender/ethnic/racial grievance studies is to paint the US as the worst country in the world. Which is why I expect the Nigerian slave girl story to go off the front burner if it already hasn’t.

Slavery is a uniquely white, racist, American phenomenon. Right now African and African American studies professors are figuring out how to blame American imperialism and US colonialism for Boko Haram.

It’s why the feminists joined the Muslim Student Association to ban Ayaan Hirsi Ali from being a commencement speaker becasuse of teh racisms and Islamophobias.

What the gender/ethnic/grievance studies guild can’t ever allow is perspective. You could never do an honest course comparing the US to cultures around the world. Because then students would find out that America is among the least racist countries on earth, if not the least. That’s why people of all races and ethnicities immigrate here. And if their minds don’t bet poisoned by academia and our media, they prosper despite the myth of “white privilege.”

America is no doubt among the least “patriarchal” society in the world. Other countries, such as Iceland and other Scandinavian countries, score better on UN evaluations because they have more draconian leftist laws requiring their societies to be “ungendered.” But the idea that there are no gender differences between men and women is a leftist fabrication, and despite their laws those societies are just as “gendered” as ours. Women don’t actually have any greater opportunities there than here.

And as we all know Islam is far more oppressive of women than we are by any measure. And if you know anything about Boko Haram they are following Muhammad’s example to the letter. Islam permits up to four wives, but frees Muslims to have as many sex slaves (“that which your right hand possesses”) as they can capture during their jihad against the infidels. Muhammad sure did; in fact there’s a hadith and a sura in the Koran justifying Muhammad’s oath-breaking to his wives so he could rape his slave, Mariyeh the Copt, who bore him a son.

The above are the last things the feminists want their indoctrinated subjects to discover, so Ayaan Hirsi Ali can’t be allowed to speak. It would destroy their narrative that Islam frees women (ironically that’s what Boko Haram and their Islamist supporters around the world are saying to justify forcing girls into sex slavery; they are better off than in a free society getting an un-Islamic education). It would destroy the narrative that Amerikkka is so patriarchal and oppressive that all PIV sex is rape. What? And sex between a master and a slave isn’t rape?

Feminists like the others in the grievance don’t care about what they claim to care about. They don’t care about women. They care about the narrative. And the narrative is only about the US.